Lori Gliha

Importance: High Dear Lori, This is in respanse to your second email of December 11, 2015, please see below. Your Questions In our interview, you said the following, “Simply said, the protocol that we were using - | do not believe it is protective of public health and therefore more needs to be done in our testing protocal to ensure that we're identifying risk. We're addressing lead exposure and we are dealing with the issue proactively. Flint deserves safe drinking water.” Are you referring to the method by which the state was testing for lead in the water when you use the word protocol in this statement? DEQ Answer: What was meant by this statement is that the lead and copper rule, as written, was designed to assess the effectiveness of corrosion control measures utilized by a water supply. It was not designed to determine individual health exposure risks. As a result the DEQ has become very proactive in engaging all of our partners to address health exposure concerns. The testing that is currently being done in the Flint Schools is very rigorous and goes well beyond any regulatory requirements. We typically take approximately 200-300 samples at each school in a single sarnpling event. We are evaluating the water mains, the piping throughout the building as well as the components used such as the salder and fixtures. The good news is that the testing so far indicates that the issues in the schools are predominantly fixture related and they are not deep in the plumbing, so the fixes are going to be relatively straight forward. Once we have completed our evaluation we will use what we have learned to create guidance for all of the schools in the State of Michigan. In addition we will share our information with the U.S. EPA and we will partner with them to develop protocols that go beyond corrosion control and focus on health exposure. Thank you. Dan Wyant Director 517-284-6700

Dear Mr. Wyant, Thank you again, for sitting down with us for an interview regarding the water crisis in Flint. i have a couple of quick questions to clarify if you can please help answer these today: 1~ What is the current method that the state is using to test the water in Flint? How, specifically, is it different (ar the same as) the testing that occurred prior to the public recognition of a lead risk in the water? Does pre-flushing occur naw? is the state using wide-mouthed bottles or narrow bottles? is the water sampled at a slow rate as it is coming from the faucet? 2-When you admitted a mistake in the “proper protocal,” in October, were you referencing more than one specific protocol, or just the lack of corrosion control? Thank youl Sincerely, Lori Jane Gliha America Tonight Al Jazeera America (202) 997-1382 xxxEND_PAGE:deq26_b124_1199_1207_3 (orl GihaWaliazeers Date: December 1 i, 2015 at lac5a84 Abt CST

Hi Mr. Wyant, In addition to the last email | sent, | wanted to clarify one more comment you made to make sure | clearly understand to which “protocol” you were referring. In our interview, you said the following, “Simply said, the protocol that we were using - | do not believe it is protective of public health and therefore more needs to be done in our testing protocol to ensure that we’re identifying risk. We’re addressing lead exposure and we are dealing with the issue proactively. Flint deserves safe drinking water.” Are you referring to the method by which the state was testing for lead in the water when you use the word protocol in this statement? Thank you for your help with these three questions. Our story is scheduled to air December 16, at 9:30pm. Sincerely, Lori Jane Gliha America Tonight Al Jazeera America (202) 997-1382 xxxEND_PAGE:deq24_b237_0586_0588_3